You can type here any text you want

The Only 3300 lb. Buick V6 in the 8s using...

Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!
Status
Not open for further replies.
turbobuick said:
You are very condescending to anyone who criticizes you or tries to offer advice hence your closing statement above. I believe you referred to TSO racers as fools for not understanding something or other you where ranting about previously in this thread.
Click to expand...
Before you make claims like that, I suggest that you go over this entire thread and find the post I made, then make a quote of it for us all to see where I called anyone a fool. Anyone else is welcome to do the same.
 
Dusty Bradford said:
Here's a video showing why we build a car to fit the rules of a class.

Dusty Bradford - Ultimate Street @ SGMP Radial Revolution - YouTube

If you enjoy playing in a sandbox by yourself. More power to you. As for us class racers, we enjoy competition that can be measured on the track, not in the mind.

My class at this race had 33 entries. I fielded the fastest turbo car in the class. Those runs were all made with an 80mm turbo at only 40# lighter than you. It has the wrong un-equal length headers, the wrong cam, no oxygenated fuels and an out of the box intake straight from edelbrock.

Going back to your 76mm. I assume you felt the turbo was holding you back. The heads were flowing more air than the turbo could support. So could you have swapped to a GT47-80mm and ran 5.10's? If you could then we could easily say your manifolding and cam choice is indeed magic.
Click to expand...
Dusty. You sure like to parade your accomplishments to everyone. Not faulting you for it. I think it's great when people can accomplish goals that they feel are important to them. Maybe you should start your own thread. What do you think about that? I mean, you're more than welcome to show us what goals you've accomplished on this thread that I started, but just saying, if I had jumped into someone elses thread and started bragging on my accomplishments, I might feel a little wierd. Just sayin'.
We're kinda trying to discuss what others have done with 1.83, 1.5 valves. Not sure why that makes some of you want to jump in here and brag of your big valved, big cubes stuff. Again, I don't mind, but I find it a bit interesting.
 
turbobuick said:
That being said I am just going to unsubscribe from this thread AGAIN
Click to expand...
Siting a silly argument is not the same as stating that a person is a fool. When you find that post where I called anyone a fool, you're more than welcome to show it to everyone by quoting it. Good luck with that.
 
Dusty Bradford said:
So you want to compare what someone did 20 years ago to what your doing today? 20 years ago a ported stock head engine barely ran 11's and now they are on the verge of running 8's. With a turbo maybe 10 mm larger than what they had back then.

Then your looking to compare a street car with say a 66mm turbo making 30psi to yours because the heads flow the same and they both make 30psi of boost. You seem to forget every single one of these iron head cars are using stock blocks and majority of them turn less than 6000rpm because they are..........street cars. This scenario is laughable.

There's only one hiding behind a blanket.
Click to expand...
You're missing the whole point of the comparison. Or, you're simply wanting to ignore it for whatever reason. What is it about my comparison scenario that has your panties in such a bunch?
 
Dusty Bradford said:
So can you tell me the simple reason a car with twin 60's at 30psi will make more power than the exact same combination with a single 70mm? Intake boost is 30psi in both car's. No cam change, no manifold change but the car with twins will make more power. Why is that?
Click to expand...
I think everyone here knows. Now, the more important question. How much more power?
 
Dusty Bradford said:
If you enjoy playing in a sandbox by yourself. More power to you. As for us class racers, we enjoy competition that can be measured on the track, not in the mind.
Click to expand...
The only person to achieve this type of performance level, proven 'on the track', using small valved heads. Hmmm. Yes. This is a lonely sand box. :) (throwing sand up in the air, annoying the adults)
 
Dusty Bradford said:
So can you tell me the simple reason a car with twin 60's at 30psi will make more power than the exact same combination with a single 70mm? Intake boost is 30psi in both car's. No cam change, no manifold change but the car with twins will make more power. Why is that?
Click to expand...

One word: Backpressure

Kevin.
 
That's correct. Low backpressure, and all the things that can be done to take full advantage of it.
Mission accomplished.
 
DonWG said:
Dusty. You sure like to parade your accomplishments to everyone. Not faulting you for it. I think it's great when people can accomplish goals that they feel are important to them. Maybe you should start your own thread. What do you think about that? I mean, you're more than welcome to show us what goals you've accomplished on this thread that I started, but just saying, if I had jumped into someone elses thread and started bragging on my accomplishments, I might feel a little wierd. Just sayin'.
We're kinda trying to discuss what others have done with 1.83, 1.5 valves. Not sure why that makes some of you want to jump in here and brag of your big valved, big cubes stuff. Again, I don't mind, but I find it a bit interesting.
Click to expand...

The point is....the turbo is the limit. A gt47-80mm running 5.18 at 137mph. If you want to prove your on to something special then see if you can max a 80mm turbo out with your engine. If you can go 5 teens at nearly 140mph with your combo, then we would see what your patting your self on the back for. Or if you feel that is out of reach, try a 45-76mm and run equal times to the TSL cars like Billy T and Gary Harmon. When you get in a comparable sand box you will prove to this entire board that you have done something remarkable. At the same time you will show the world that a 1.83/1.5 valve is enough to support a 76mm turbo at 7500 rpm. If someone else tries it without any success, then you know it truely is your manifolding that is the advantage.
 
DonWG said:
I think everyone here knows. Now, the more important question. How much more power?
Click to expand...

So much that you would want to start with a stage 2 bottom end for the test. I'd even start out with the twins first then back up to the single 70mm. It's that much difference.
 
Dusty Bradford said:
The point is....the turbo is the limit. A gt47-80mm running 5.18 at 137mph. If you want to prove your on to something special then see if you can max a 80mm turbo out with your engine. If you can go 5 teens at nearly 140mph with your combo, then we would see what your patting your self on the back for. Or if you feel that is out of reach, try a 45-76mm and run equal times to the TSL cars like Billy T and Gary Harmon. When you get in a comparable sand box you will prove to this entire board that you have done something remarkable. At the same time you will show the world that a 1.83/1.5 valve is enough to support a 76mm turbo at 7500 rpm. If someone else tries it without any success, then you know it truely is your manifolding that is the advantage.
Click to expand...
If a person was only concerned with top end efficiency, what sort of compressor efficiency would you choose to have? 78% efficiency, or 65% efficiency? I'm going to assume because of your argument that you would choose a turbo that would give you a 65% efficiency. I'm interested in why would you choose 65% over 78%?
 
DonWG said:
If your answer is the turbo, then someone could make the same argument for a large capacity air filter mounted on a particular engine that is only using 66% of the filter breathing capacity. Sounds a bit silly to me to make an argument like that, but then, when your back is against the wall, you've got to find something, and a turbo is such a bitchin external device to use for a silly argument.
Click to expand...

Did you really just ask to compare a turbo to an air filter for performance reasons?
 
Otto J said:
Did you really just ask to compare a turbo to an air filter for performance reasons?
Click to expand...
Yes I did. You can't see it? Someone wants to restrict the air intake into an engine in an attempt to control the maximum power level. That can be done in a multitude of ways, including the air delivery capacity of a turbocharger. I don't understand why that is so hard to understand.
 
Or, am I that far behind the times that small turbos can now, very efficiently deliver an unlimited amount of air to an engine?

Help me here, guys. I guess I'm a little lost. You guys been keeping secrets from me?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
Buick V6 Billet Hydralic roller camshaft. Brand new
1
337
modular46
M
M
Buick V6 Accufab 65mm throttle body
0
137
modular46
M
M
Buick V6 Champion Aluminum heads - Ready to bolt on
0
283
modular46
M
M
Buick V6 3 inch downpipe with test pipe
0
172
modular46
M
8
Stock Turbo 20 Psi
2
25
2K
~JM~
J

Online statistics

Members online
28
Guests online
304
Total visitors
332
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top